On Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 12:44:01PM +0000, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
>Sorry, but if you don't copy the author, I don't get to see this for a
>while! There's far too much traffic on that list for me to subscribe to
>it, so I just read archives.
>
>
>> Nope. The isystem was just to get the include order correct. It is
>> a recent addition.
>
>Then the `local' is a mistake! I am sure it was never tested.
Why is it a mistake? I added the functionality of searching the
/usr/local/include/mingw directory and tried to preserve the
ordering that gcc requires.
The fact that the mingw directory needs to be included before the
gcc include directory is problematic. It's counter to the way
that gcc is supposed to operate. I'll have to think about what
to do there, or, better yet, Mumit or Earnie will tell me precisely
what they want done.
Anyway, I made the gcc available specifically for testing. This is a
work in progress.
>> Could you possibly break out this diff into separate lines so that I can
>> see what's changed?
>
>No, it is a single line in the specs file. It doesn't work broken into
>lines. Can you not apply this as patch and diff the two in emacs?
I'm aware that it is not a single line in the specs file however, if you
broke up the old and new specs file into distinct lines, a diff would
show specifically what changed. I don't have a problem physically viewing
long lines.
>Oh, and although the comment suggests -mno-cygwin and -mno-win32 are
>incompatible, that's actually what you get with -mno-cygwin by default.
>To get the Win32 header files you need -mno-cygwin -mwin32.
That's a bug.
cgf
--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
